Pregnant women sue President Trump for 'unilaterally and unconstitutionally' seeking to strip children of citizenship
Source: Law & Crime
Jan 26th, 2025, 4:48 pm
Pregnant women across the country have been joining forces to file lawsuits against the federal government over the constitutionality of President Donald Trumps executive order ending birthright citizenship in the United States, according to court records.
Attorneys in Maryland, Massachusetts and Washington state have filed lawsuits on behalf of expecting parents in response to Trumps order last week, which has been blasted as blatantly unconstitutional by federal judges as it runs into legal trouble.
Attorneys general of 18 states and two major cities, San Francisco and Washington, D.C., have also teamed up to challenge the order filing a joint lawsuit last Tuesday, Jan. 21, in federal district court.
Plaintiffs bring this action to protect their states, localities, and residents from the Presidents flagrantly unlawful attempt to strip hundreds of thousands American-born children of their citizenship based on their parentage, the complaint says. The principle of birthright citizenship has been enshrined in the Constitution for more than 150 years. The Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment unambiguously and expressly confers citizenship on [a]ll persons born in and subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. More than 125 years ago, the Supreme Court confirmed that this entitles a child born in the United States to noncitizen parents to automatic citizenship.
Read more: https://lawandcrime.com/lawsuit/pregnant-women-sue-president-trump-for-unilaterally-and-unconstitutionally-seeking-to-strip-children-of-citizenship/
Link to LAWSUIT (PDF) - https://help.asylumadvocacy.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/birthright-citizenship-complaint.pdf
BadgerKid
(4,730 posts)Just thinking about the legal ducks to line up.
Mountain Mule
(1,065 posts)In my wildest dreams. I have to say that life in a direct democracy that refuses to get dragged into anyone else's wars is looking pretty sweet to me these days. Plus, as a Swiss citizen I could get pregnant - in vitro of course - and join that lawsuit.
I think that is the best idea I've heard of since November 5th.
Think. Again.
(20,750 posts)Karasu
(439 posts)louis-t
(23,901 posts)He really think if he snaps his finger, everyone will fall in line.
calimary
(85,035 posts)And despite his real estate portfolio, he DOESNT own EVERYTHING.
And he MOST DEFINITELY doesnt own US.
louis-t
(23,901 posts)He won with Colombia. They can't afford to get slapped with tariffs. He won with Disney, who let ABC and Stephanopoulis 'apologize' for being so mean to him by telling the truth about his crimes. Most countries will tell him to go fuck himself.
FakeNoose
(36,394 posts)Why should it take more than a 9-month gestation cycle for an immigrant to be granted citizenship?
They take a class, then they take a test. If they pass, they get sworn in as freshly-minted US citizens.
Problem goes away.
LeftInTX
(31,902 posts)The plaintiffs are in the process of asylum. They are here "legally temporarily" because they have a hearing pending. The courts are booked for months. Their legal status at this point is similar to someone who is here on a temporary tourist Visa etc.
At the hearing they will determine whether they are eligible to continue in the asylum process. It is not unusual for a court to deny asylum. If they determine they are eligible, they may be eligible for residency or may have another step. Nevertheless they are here legally because they have a pending court hearing.
FakeNoose
(36,394 posts)I still think the process can be speeded up considerably. The US government is causing the delays, not the immigrants.
LeftInTX
(31,902 posts)They have the first interview when they arrive. They are given cursory background checks. If they don't pass the check, they are removed. After the initial interview hurdle, they are given the court date. (Months in the future)
Then at their court hearing, much of the evidence comes into play: What country are the from? Were they tortured? Are they in danger if they go back? etc etc etc.....
It's a "danger hurdle" they must overcome. It also gives the federal government time to research their case. Were they involved with gangs in their home country? How were they involved? For instance, we do admit some MS13 members, if they are seeking asylum from MS13, but we don't admit them if they are coming here with the intention of creating gangs here.
If it comes out that, they are "here to work" (which many are), they will probably be denied asylum. They must be in danger or from a certain designated country, such as Venezuela.
calimary
(85,035 posts)Load him down with lawsuits. Bedevil him with complications. He cant throw ALL of us in jail. Hell, he doesnt even get how many of us there are.
And there are a million ways and places to throw a monkey wrench into the works.